The Gun was a labour of love and built by Mr Kenny White of Pennsylvania (The Gent in the high hat and big grin) with a home built rifling machine to reproduce the unique Whitworth rifling. The breach is also correct to original design with the double concentric screw thread (try getting that machined by a modern machinist) Sadly kenny passed away Quietly at home in his favorite chair thinking up his next adventure earlier this year. The Whitworth rifle and his other guns have been sold on to new owners so they will continue to compete with the best.
@@karood-dog3584 well thank you for keeping a important part of history alive, this was where artillery was taken beyond tossing a powder charged stone in a general direction of the enemy. this was the start of precision engineering. and modern combat tactics. but its hard for me to put that gun in perspective, what was it used for in the 1860s and 1870s? defeating bunkers and emplacements? punching thru sandbags? or was it just a big sniper rifle essentially?
@@karood-dog3584 isnt it safer to use a fuse when training around a big gun? just light it and run away! dont have to be nearby when it goes off like u would with a lanyard? seems like less liability to me to test a gun from a safe distance from it for the first few shots? if that pressure chamber detonates, id rather be more than a lanyards length from it personally :)
The Gun is owned and built by Mr K White a NSSA competitor. It is a very accurate reproduction of the Whitworth rifle with the correct whitworth rifling and the dual concentric screw on the breach. Measurements were taken from an original whitworth in the reserve collection at the museum in Gettysburg. There are several other whitworths out there but they have a single screw breach and conventional rifling.
I was just shown this, hilarious! I didn't actually expect it to be funny (sorry). "All black with stuff sticking out" bahaha, killer. Just look at this guy, replying to every damn comment, waffling on. What a fucking loser.
Well Mr Michael Yardley has apparently left the building so my in box will slow down a little now. Ironically during our last conversation I was ordering a Grenade launcher "Merica!!!!!!" Sorry Mike I know you do not approve! Well there's three feet of snow outside the boy is off school so perhaps it's time to go ring some steel at the range. Komeso nonyati! Karoo
First, man up and declare who you are. Second. don't you foolish people realise that what you are doing is anti-PR for modern British shooting? Do you really think the public would be comfortable with people using AR's and modern military style weaponry for 'sport'? Do you think you could justify that in a public debate? You are living on another planet. The public don't like game shooting much either nor trophy hunting. It is up to us to keep our own house in order in all these areas - if we don't we will cease to exist. The black gun/tactical craze, meantime, is a US import that we could well do without. It is born of insecurity and plays on peoples fear and fantasies. Even in the US it has been subject to much criticism. The New York Times recently wrote: "It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people ... These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism..."
+michael yardley Wow you really do keep banging on don't you! I thought this movie would drift off but you are just keeping it going and going nearly 2000 views for a little parody that was made for a very small private group. your obsession with the appearance of a firearm and not the fact that it functions in the same way as all other legal firearms astounds me. I'm fully aware of the lengths that people like you go to to put a positive spin on your trophy hunting big game fantasies, careful use of words Harvesting, Culling when actually you are just killing. I worked in Southern Africa with an anti poaching unit so I have seen so many of you "sportsmen" guffawing and bragging in bars with your brand new Safari clothes from Joburg airport. like they say I see both sides of your face Mr Yardley.
What is good PR is to tell people ( police & politicians)about the d isciplines that are shot & the types of weapons used & the jobs involved & the impact of businesses (Like SGC, SRC)if more bans come along?. That is better than simply denouncing it. Telling them that a clay-shoot with a semi is no different to a match with an AR or Saiga 12 for or CSR practical shotgun. Most people will listen to that & they might have a better understanding of things. All you're doing is playing into the hands of antis who love shooters disagreeing with their own crowd & proving that they were right all along. This is what happened in Australia, after Port Arthur. Some hunters & clay shots over there said, you don't need a semi or a pump shotgun to hunt, if you can't hit a bird with a maximum of 2 shots, you're no hunter. How would you feel if a fellow hunter said that & it meant you could lose you semi forever? You'd feel angry & betrayed at that wouldn't you, like how some people on here feel.
+Karoo D-Dog you still hide behind anonymity like most trolls. Man up and declare who you are. Meantime, many in the mainstream shooting world believe that the fetish for military style gear and 'tactical' this and that is an unhealthy one. We are sportsmen not soldiers or policemen.
You really are a frightful bully Mike, You are the "public figure" not me I have no wish to be in the limelight and perform the unelected duties of judge, Jury and executioner for the British shooting public. People are getting out and shooting more and more in official NRA matches (do you remember why the NRA was formed? those threats are gone now but Military Rifles have always been a part of the sport) yet you feel the need to try and undermine a sport with outrageous claims of wrong doing that you never substantiate. all to protect your own narrow minded view of shooting sports, perhaps it's the working class lads that offend the most. Your words are doing more harm than a few guys shooting Service rifle matches with bolt action AR's. Not to metion your Karamojo Bell fantasied killing trips.
Ps. nearly 2000 views while that's not very much at all for youtube it is for a movie intended for a very small private audience. I'd like to thank the Academy British sporting marksmen/women who love shooting sports and not elitism. and last but not least Mr Mike Yardley without his never ending banging on and attempts to intimidate those he deems not right thinking this would never have got 100 views.
Mike Yardley can spin it any way he likes but the fact remains he is pandering to those who would like to dismantle all shooting sports in the UK and the EU. He is encouraging legislation based on cosmetics rather than any sound meaningful reasoning. Furthermore he is assisting in peddling the lie that the public will somehow be protected from terrorism by foisting this nonsense on legitimate, decent, law-abiding shooters. And, looking at the wider view, he is encouraging theft by the state of legally owned property. The core fact is governments really don't like shooting sports. They don't like the idea of anyone other than themselves owning them. They will do anything to be rid of civilian shooters and are hugely inconvenienced that in our faux democracies so many people enjoy shooting in so many disciplines. It makes it hard to ban them and retain votes. So they play the longer game - over many decades. A slow but constant drip of legislation to foist the illusion of safety on the general public and acclimatize shooters to limply accept the next set of measures. Break resistance up by focusing on one group of shooters while the others stand idle because their shooting discipline is safe (for the moment) and it is is hardly resistance at all. And so it continues. Clearly Mike Yardley's exquisite and rather expensive shotguns will probably be safe for many years to come - so that's all right then. Mike, I don't post under my real name because I have a duty as a responsible firearm owner to observe basic security protocols. Flagging myself as likely owning a number of firearms and shotguns when posting my two pence on forums would be an invitation to treat to criminals. That's how we do our bit to prevent crime and terrorism - by employing common sense You should give it a go.
Obama's proposals on gun control are hardly extreme but the reaction to them is already hysterical. Mind you, I think the president was over emotional too in his presentation. Good law must be based in reason. Good law must also be debated too, and subject to due democratic process - not just imposed by executive order diktat. The problem is so complex. Guns are very freely available in the US, and, as importantly, ammunition too. There is a loop-hole at gun shows which should be blocked imo. The real problem though, the main one, is cultural - a society addicted to violence especially in the inner cities. This is fueled by drugs, and to some extent encouraged by the constant the depiction of violence in popular entertainment. Meantime, as readers of this page will be well aware, I think some sections of the shooting community in the US have an unhealthy obsession with modern military style weapons and self defence. In the US, this relates, I believe, to a post-Vietnam, post 9/11, sense of national decline, and also to a deep fear of powerlessness experienced by some individuals in modern society. I am also concerned that the craze for military style guns, which sometimes becomes a fetish, has spread to the UK. There are some increasingly extreme advocates of it here who sometimes campaign under a false slogan of 'unity' amongst British gun owners as they surreptitiously introduce some very un-British ideas onto their partially veiled agenda (such as 'concealed carry' for the purposes of self-defence). This is an unhealthy trend in my opinion. Modern military style weapons have no place in sport, give quite the wring impression to the public, and may pander to unhealthy fantasy in some. I can remember, for example, how full-bore pistol shooting became a bit weird in the UK before the Hungerford and Dunblane tragedies. I was younger then and participating in various action shooting disciplines - notably 'practical' pistol shooting. But, I can see with the benefit of experience, that too many people then were getting too obsessive about it all, too tied up in militaristic day-dreaming rather than sport marksmanship. I don't promote banning anything more here, but I do think we should think about what we do and co-operate with the authorities wherever possible in keeping guns out of the wrong hands - and - beyond that - doing all we can to ensure our sport moves in a healthy, socially positive, direction. I abhor excessive PC policy, but I also deride the 'Gun Nuts' who tells me a semi-auto full rifle or pistol and a stack of magazines does not, potentially, facilitate mass killing. They are deluded. I suspect they defend their view with such vehemence, because, in their hearts, they know their argument is false. What they are really defending is their own challenged power and perhaps some mistaken sense of manhood connected to their ownership and use of this style of weapon. They are being supremely selfish. The public good must come first, before personal pleasure. We all have a responsibility to uphold this.
Surely this debate is all about sensitivity? it is not about one gun or another specifically, it is generally about how we carry ourselves now and present our sport. It is also about the issue as to whether we should ape the military and police in what we do as civilian shooters. Sport shooting has always been influenced by the military and visa versa, but the interest in military style equipment and tactics now is getting obsessive in some quarters. I think that is a potentially unhealthy trend although I have enjoyed used all types of firearms myself over the years. Meantime, modern synthetic materials obviously have a place in sporting gun manufacture - but our guns do not need to look like Armalites. If more of our guns take on this look, I can guarantee we will suffer for it in the media (and possibly for other reasons relating to the promotion of obsession). I have already been interrogated on live TV by hostile presenters noting words to the effect of: "but that's not a sporting gun is it?" We can argue till the cows come home as to whether such guns are truly sporting, but our enemies will use their aesthetics against us. That may be based on misunderstanding, but it's something that must be seriously considered whether convenient or not.
+michael yardley So if you can't beat them, join them? You've given up and turned your back on this sport Michael. Of course it would be easier to just stop using the guns that cause the most friction with the public, we're not stupid, we understand the perception that these guns can give. However we're prepared to put in the work to break these misconceptions. If they dislike the look of an AR-15 and we stop using them then they'll start disliking the look of pump action shotguns...... can you see where this is going? Instead of putting all this time an effort into saying how AR-15s and other military style weapons will be our undoing, why not join in with changing the image of it instead. There's nothing wrong with running around a forest shooting steel, it's the wrong image that the public have that's the problem. Why don't you help with this instead of doing some of the worse damage I've seen a shooter do to this sport. With your connections and media presence you could be doing a hell of a lot of good for the image of these sorts of guns, instead you're using it for the exact opposite.
Can I ask you something Mr Yardley? What have you got against black rifles personally ? Do you realise that your fellow shooting journalists Harry Dolazell, Pete Moore, Robert Bucknell & Derek Launders have all owned & or shot handguns & military semi-automatic firearms in their time & resented loosing them. Pete & Robert used the black rifles for pest-control & I learned a lot from reading Petes articles, than I ever did from the mainstream media.The police & some government MPs don't like us having guns & want to disarm us. Chris Williamson is one such plonker from Labour.You shouldn't give them any quarter at all. These people are no different to that meddlesome woman Marshall-Andrews of the GCN.At the end of the day it doesn't matter what a person owns, it's whether or not they are fit enough to or not. You yourself know what these people are like & one day the guns you shoot might get banned. There are already calls from GCN to ban pump-actions & semi-auto shotguns.
+MarineAqua45 I have owned and shot them too. I lost a number of guns in the various bans. But, that is not the point now. I understand some shooting people may not see where I am coming from. Here is the bottom line, as someone on the media front-line, someone who has survived literally hundreds of hostile, sometimes hysterical, TV and radio interviews, I know we must keep our house carefully in order. If we don't, our future is by no means assured. If there was a real offensive against the shooting sports - and one could arrive at any moment with another incident - we must make sure that we are on rock solid ground to defend ourselves against an already biased and difficult media. I can't defend shooting feathered clays, killing beasts just to have a bigger head than someone else, or, playing with guns that look like modern military weapons. None of these things do us any good, and anyone with pretensions of sportsmanship should realise it, scrutinise what they do, and maybe, shock-horror, even change a bit. I have. If we don't do this, we won't survive. Shooting must evolve with the times and so must we.
For 30 years I have defended British shooting in the media to the best of my abilities and at considerable personal cost. I say now only that we should consider carefully the direction in which some sectors of our sport is now moving. I HAVE NOT proposed any new bans and would not (I do say that the growing fetish for paramilitary kit and games in British shooting sport should be the subject of critical discussion). Bans, though, are a knee-jerk response which have only hurt innocent people. With regard to pheasant shooting and hunting. I have been critical of OVER-COMMERCIALISED pheasant shooting where birds become feathered clays. Many are. I love to shoot game when it is properly respected and consumed. I want to see my children and my grandchildren still shooting game - it is one of greatest of all sporting activities. Similarly I deplore so called 'CANNED HUNTING'. I love to stalk deer and hunt big game in natural conditions, but this sort of hunting, though profitable, is ethically indefensible. The media jump upon it for obvious reasons. I am critical of all those things mentioned above because they damage us and MAY BE USED AGAINST US. If some tending to fanatical positions don't see that - it's a tragedy for our future. It is also a tragedy that a significant number of shooters appear to be hostile to free speech and can only respond to it with abuse, personal attack and threat. I would say this to them, meantime, criticise my ideas by all means but do not not lie, mislead or abuse because you don't want to argue. ps. I rather enjoyed the film!
You ought to do a 180 on your scary guns frightening Joe Public theme. If some vote-chasing MPs and the Snowdrops get a whiff of it they might get the idea to run with it. Then after that 'western style' BP revolvers and under levers - because it panders to cowboy wannabes. After that it'll be WWII surplus rifles - too much like wannabe soldiers. Then it'll just be you and your braying mates propping up bars in Kenya and the Cotswold's. Then the politicians will think 'all this time, money, and police resources taken up by some toffs in tweed and their FAC and SGC renewals; we've done away with other shooting sports, let's dot the "i's" and "t"'s on this last little clique. Few people will mind, it's only a few thousand people now. We won't even need to compensate them'. As long as us black rifle owners stand you have a buffer.
Wow, so the NRA have taken a leaf out of the UKPSA's book and gone after people ex-military and pro-military? The neverending betrayal by them never ceases to amaze.
+Watch Ryder No this one was all about some walts (wearing full uniform) showing up at Bisley and some gentle ribbing of some of the lads on the competition circuit. as far as I know the only regulation is don't play dress up and wear full uniforms. I don't know if you ever came across the two muppets in full uniform who were regulars on 100m Short Siberia during the week? AKA the weight watchers Navy SEALS, sort of like those guys.
I hear you, but a society needs an outlet for such things, whether it's on the range or a re-enactment. On the longbow scene some folks get dressed up in period dress, some wear camo, others just do shorts and T-Shirt. We don't care that much as long as they can draw and shoot the bow accurately.
+South Seas I've read His Bio and while he says he graduated RMA Sandhurst I don't remember him every mentioning a Regiment (Possibly a TA one somewhere). But I have not really seen him claim to be one either. I'm sure he'd have been droning on about it otherwise ;)
+South Seas Well there you go, officers tend to be very snooty and look down on us plebs, it explains his drive on redefining what 'sport shooting'' is. I've a newsflash for you Mr Yardley it never has been about a sport, sport is how you become proficient and excel. Ultimately the practice of shooting is rooted in our past for national emergency.
michael yardley It's not fantasy to have a civilian element of the population capable of using firearms if things got out of hand. You are aware of the Paris massacre? I'll bet even the most rabid liberal would want a helping hand if a law abiding gun owner was nearby.
+Watch Ryder and who would regulate these 'law-abiding gun owners'? I do;t think you would get much public or political support for such a lunatic plan in the UK. It is a fanciful and farcical proposal in our context. The idea that quite a few people here would seem to want to do this - indulging their vigilante fantasies - is quite disturbing. What happens when the fire-fight goes wrong? Have any of you wallies actually been under fire? I very much doubt it.
lets look at mikes response in detail. first he questions taste and timing, yet it was He who used the Paris atrocity to push his views. He then dismisses the video as childish to add weight to his argument. the use of the word reasonable to define his support (although apparently they only private message him) again renders any other valid view as unreasonable. Anonymous yep I am but I care deeply about my security. again the theme of free speech that Mike likes to throw around but it only applies to him. the bullying "I'm the innocent victim" line is one of his favorites. But above all what we have to remember Mike is a journalist and he aims to manipulate through his statements and responses. Safe shooting Karoo
+Karoo D-Dog no, I did not use the Paris tragedy to push my ideas. Rubbish. I have been talking about these issues and confronting paramilitaristic and racist bullies for months.
+Karoo D-Dog You do not have the confidence in your views to post them under your own name. You care so much about free speech that you censor a letter which opposes your argument. Meantime, you let a load of adolescent trolls use obscene and abusive language which you do no moderate. Yup, that's really impressive.
Whenever the Daily Fail wheel out an "expert" it's always going to be good... "It could be used to engage targets up to 100 meters away". Oh right? Stand 200M away and we'll see.
+michael yardley why don't you protest against the paramilitish of the armed police ! The met police in particular like play dress up like they think are in the sas! When they are anything but ! No doubt you support agents of the state getting more firepower and looking like sas wannabes
Mike Yardley - I think these comments just highlights how badly you are perceived by the people and sport you claim to represent. Perhaps you could could take some time out to reflect. Please?
+Adam Pitt Adam well many people, ordinary shooters, have supported me thus far too (more than who have opposed what I have said). A significant number disagree which is fine, but please judge me on what I have actually said or written and not what others suggest I have. I do listen to all serious comment. I have taken the stance that I have because I thought it necessary. I have watched with great sadness what has happened to shooting in the US over the last 20 years - it has become distorted with military kit and a growing obsession for 'self defence' and 'Concealed Carry'. This has been imported increasingly into the UK. I think it is all born of deep insecurity.
+michael yardley and whats wrong with self defence ?? what are those people supposed to sucriface their lives or loved ones for the good of socity ?? CCW has actaully saved lives it doesnt get mationed in the press those wishing to carry have to a get a proper liance from their chief of police and do a training course ! if CCW had caused problems then those states that allow it would have put a stop it long time ago ! also some states have simular gun laws to the uk (pre 97 type) such as NJ, CT, MAS, NYC! also some european countries allow CCW as well ! every EU country allows the holding of a pistol for self protection in the home ! its only the UK and people like you that are wrong !
+geezerp1982 I agree, I'm actually legally empowered to CCW overseas and DO CCW overseas. :) If you go through the legal channels it's quite attainable.
+geezerp1982 I have no problem with it in some parts of the US with very high gun crime rates. In the UK it is a foolish idea. We have 3 firearms homicides a month - there are 1000+ in the US. Two entirely different situations.
Brilliant. You just don't get it do you Mr Yardley? Appeasement never works (the WWII reference is surprisingly relevant) - the NRA abandoned self loading fullbore rifles in 1988 to the detriment of all shooting sports. Now we have you - the Judas amongst us - who wants certain types of rifles banned based upon the way they look and the clothes we wear. Please, before you open your silly mouth again, engage your brain and think of what you're doing. CSR, for example, is shot in winter, with no nice dry mats to lie on, so tough waterproof clothing is important - often the affordable versions of which come in green or camouflage. I started shooting CSR because it's a fast sport involving movement and I was bored of FTR (with it's "sniper rifles" - there, gave you that one for free) I have no Walter Mitty desire to be a soldier or dream of shooting any living thing. Once I'm old and unable to run I'll probably go back - if there's any shooting sports still allowed by then. Bear in mind that you yourself don't "need" to go game shooting - your section of the sport with it's traditional looking guns is also potentially under threat. I'm not going to hurl insults at you, there's no need for that because you've done enough damage to your own reputation anyway. Please look at the bigger picture and see that not everyone enjoys the type of shooting that you prefer. I'm quite happy to defend ALL sporting shooting, even the disciplines in which I don't participate.
+Ben Randall You misrepresent me. I want no more legal firearms banned in the UK. I do want people to think about paramilitarism encroaching on UK shooting sport.
+michael yardley So, you claim that you don't want any legal firearms banned in the UK, but you persist in banging on about "paramilitarism" (I'm not completely convinced that's a real word), so I suppose from that you just don't like the clothes that some people wear? Or is it the look of modern firearms seeing as they're all scary and black (apart from the ones that aren't) and don't have wood on them? So you'd prefer that we all just gave up these legal firearms anyway, stepped back to the 1950's and just wandered around fields popping off at bunnies while wearing tweed? Can you hear yourself? Can you appreciate how absurd you sound? Any thoughts on the fact that these activities might be someone else's sport and they might actually be having fun, rather than trying to train to join the SAS? I think all that you're scared of is the modern world. Modern designed firearms (ie since about 1955) look like that. Some people wear some camouflage - others don't. So what?! I hope you drop your silly hat in a muddy puddle and you get bunted by a sheep.
+geezerp1982 I'd go one further and say that the NRA should have continued the traditions of the Volunteer Force (before it got stolen and absorbed into the Regular Army).
+Ben Randall Just ponder this Ben, do you think I would have made these comments without much thought? I don't prefer one sort of shooting, but I do think some shooting activities, not just para-military ones, have the potential to damage us terminally. You have not walked in my shoes, nor had to face hostile interviews x100. Trust me if you had, your view might be different.
+Not Mike Yardley yup, you certainly won't flush me away as an anonymous troll who won't man up to his own post. #LittleMenWithBigSticksAndBIGkeyboards...
And by the way, I love my sport - do you think I would risk bringing all this hassle upon myself if I didn't? There is no benefit with people like you around. The reason I do it is because we have problems which should be addressed in a grown-up manner. I hate to see in States that writers have had their careers damaged, that concerted efforts were made to destroy them, for expressing the opinion that paramilitarism is bad news for shooting.
+michael yardley You keep bringing this on yourself in order to increase your public profile. It is of no coincidence that each time your views flag you make a new statement to wind people up. Then you contradict yourself. There is a word for people like that ...
+srspower I don't care about a public profile. I don't need all the hassle, I continue commenting because I don't think paramilitarism is a healthy direction 'srspower' and because I don't like see people bullied.
+michael yardley well dont spout rubbish then! wheather its in the uk, usa or europe if the gun owner is vetted and is deemed safe by the state, then its in meterial what type of gun or the clothes he wears !
+geezerp1982 You are forgetting that Michael Yardley is the most narcissistic self centred person ever in the UK shooting world, vote him away with your wallets , dont buying any publications with his name on/in them , cancel membership to any organisations he has connections and let it be known why.
This is in utterly poor taste after the Paris tragedy. You criticise me childishly because I have expressed an opinion shared by many reasonable sportsmen and women? You post this anonymously, moreover, concealing who you are. In fact, you support the many bullying little Hitlers who would stifle free speech and think there own selfish interests are paramount.
+michael yardley Ah, we meet again Mr Yardley, perhaps this time you won't accuse me of "harassment" when I pull your unfounded and completely ridiculous views apart. I'll try to not say too much as you'll only use this a chance to further inflate your own self worth. You stand behind this fabrication of an all knowing and wise shooter, you're not, you're a fraud. Every time there's someone you disagree with you delete them or block them from whatever platform they may be reaching you on, and I'm not just talking about myself. You have created this fallacy on your Facebook, in which the only people able to voice anything about you are the ones too ignorant or brain dead to see that you no longer voice any representative opinion of modern day shooting. You're old hat my friend, done, finished, well past your sell by date. What you have created is a shrine to yourself, an almost cult to yourself, where people either agree with you or have no voice at all. This fallacy has led you to believing that this is the true voice of shooters, where your egotistical nature will no longer allow you to see the engineered yes man machine you've created for yourself. If I'm not mistaken Hitler did a very similar thing, and before you get your nickers in a twist thinking I'm calling you Hilter, I'm not. I'm purely pointing out why some would see your blatant dictatorship of the shine Facebook page to yourself similar to the controlling and manipulative nature that was Hilter. You criticise those who are "anonymous" for not using their names, it is you who should be criticised as we choose to make this about the sport, not ourselves. Besides the egotistical fallacy you've created the biggest problem people have with you is your hypercritical nature. It's not ok to dress in camo and shoot black guns because of the potential "negative" image it may betray to the public, yet it's ok for you to have blood stained images of yourself with many different dead animals beside yourself. Please tell me, which one of those have just had a massive negative media campaign around it? I'll give you a clue, it involved a dentist and a lion. Further to this, you berate this "negative" image you so seemingly hate of the black rifle yet you're more than happy to pose with some smug grin holding one of the most tactical looking rifles I've seen. It's one rule for you and one for another. As I said, you're done my friend, it's over, go out quietly with whatever dignity you may have left before it's all gone and do the shooting world a favour. As you represent the minority now and myself along with the majority of shooters no longer want to have your self appointed representation of the sport continue.
+michael yardley He's right you know Mike, you deleted me from your facebook because I disagreed with you too. And I did nothing more than put my views forward in a calm and reasonable manner. You assert to be pro free speech but you are a liar. And the whole world knows it now.
Your post would have more credibility if you hadn't used the worst ever terrorist attack in Europe to push your new personal agenda. Yes new! as footage has now emerged of you calling for sportsman to oppose regulation by firearm type. You are the worst kind of bully out to destroy others sporting pass time, trying to create a public outcry against rifles that the public are not bothered about all to preserve your own big game hunting fantasy. Shame on you! #hypocrite #turncoat #negativeshooting #weseethroughyou
+srspower no I deleted you because you overstepped the mark. I reserve the right to block anyone or delete any comment on my own page. There is a clear policy there, oft stated, and anyone who wants to argue reasonably, without abuse, and with sensitivity, is always welcome to stay and debate. That is why there are many critical comments published on my page.
+Karoo D-Dog Well - Karroo dog - another anonymous keyboard warrior - this all began because I responded to someone's comment. I have been noting my opposition to paramilitarism within some sections of British shooting sport for months.
The only things I hate are blind ignorance and extremism. I hold the view that the trend towards paramilitarism in shooting sport is not a positive one. I also think there are issues in over commercialised game bird shooting and so called 'trophy hunting'. To prosper our sports must evolve, be sensitive to public opinion, and capable of withstanding all ethical scrutiny.
I like both sides of the sport, I love a traditional pheasant shoot, and tweed, and flat caps, well hell I'm at collage training to be a game keeper. But I also love unloading 30 rounds down range at some paper. Now I can clearly see that practical shooting and "military style rifles and shotguns" are on the rise at a exponential rate within the UK, yet you can't? I'm a 16 year old lad from Berkshire and I can see how this disaplin of shooting is gaining popularity, and you a supposedly expert shooter is almost oblivious to it. How tragic must that be for you?
+michael yardley Did you know that the words 'Mike Yardley' are picked up by the profanity filter on the Pigeonwatch forums and censored? Why do you think that is?
+michael yardley. Everyone goes on about our public perception... have you ever actually asked a non shooter if they care about what we wear when we are at the range, most don't even know ranges are around. and are actually quite interested in the idea of trying it. this whole thing of banning it because someone might be offended is what has got this country in the state it is in now. Who cares if you are offended?? so what? telling us what clothes we can and can't wear, what sports we can do, what we have to think while doing it... don't you think that is a bit extreme? being offended is not against the law so why do we pander to it. Our sports must evolve, and they are evolving, they are using newly designed firearms that comply with the law, to enable us to shoot competitively. you say you want our sports to evolve, yet you seem to want to keep the technology in the the 1920's, with everyone wearing hats and shooting double barrels, or bolt action rifles. that is not evolving, that is devolving. You should be praising companies out there that are raising the bar, developing new firearms, and groups that are opening new competitions and entire sports, not looking down your nose at them. people are allowed to like things other than what you decide they are allowed to like.
+michael yardley Evolve? Devolve more like. You show me one example where compromising did any good when it came to gun rights? I like how you just throw around this paramilitary word like anyone with camoflage or semi-auto, 'scary' weaponry is automatically being pigeon-holed as 'extremist'. Gentlemen I tell you this guy is either deluded or part of the 'club' that wants everyone but their tiny clique to have firearms. I've met plenty of his kind who claim one thing while steering the other way. Thankfully they only exist in small numbers in the US.
